 sillysam says: IT IS DESTABILIZING How can you run a company when the rules keep changing, when you have to worry about being second-guessed by Congress..? At this point, most Wall Street bankers would rather be attacked by wild dogs than take part. They fear that they’ll do something — make money perhaps? — that will arouse Congressional ire. Or that the rules will change... Not all the employees who face the possibility of having their bonuses taxed out from under them work for the evil financial products division... Taking away their bonuses — after they’ve already put the money in their bank accounts — hardly seems like the right way to motivate them. Maybe they can't see it from the shamrock-hued vistas of their "cottages" on the west coast of Ireland, but the political class has done nothing this last week but destroy the wealth of this country. The tax on the bonuses is exclusively for the employees of the division that is being propped up by taxpayer money. Red Herring. It is unconstitutional, Darke. Article 1 section 9 No Bills of Attainder or ex post facto It's constitution. They have more representation than the average citizen, so they should, by that merit, have more taxation. And the point is still a red herring. It isn't a red herring because not everyone in that division that is getting a bonus had something to do with the company going under. It wouldn't matter if it did. They had contracts with the company. If the company wanted to fire them and not retain them then they wouldn't have to pay them a bonus. But apparently the company believes that these people are worth keeping. How do you figure they have more representation than any other citizen? If anything they have less. They pay more in taxes and yet they only get one vote. They spend more money proppoing up the economy and creating jobs but still are subject to the same laws anyone else is. But that doesn't change the fact the a... You're contradicting yourself. Before you said they had to pay those bonuses because they were contracted to get them. Now you're saying they're paying them because those losers are worth keeping, for some strange reason. More likely, it's a 3rd option; they've got their screws so far up the company's backside that it's powerless against them. And tell us once again, why should a company pay bonuses to a failed division? Is this the American Way again? Those connected prosper, while those who work hard get f***ed over? Because that's exactly what is happening at AIG. You're defending these losers pretty hard. Could it be that *you* are one of those screwups who trashed the economy? Hmmm?? |
View the Top Clips from March 22, 2009
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|
|
|
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|
